Dumpster Diving Daddy: Limbaugh Belly-flops Into Well-Deserved Outrage!

"There's the Dollar Menu at McDonald's and 

if they don't have Chicken McNuggets, 

dial 911 and ask for Obama."

8:30PM (PT)

Until now, Michael Savage's comments on autistic children rated #1 for idiotic tastelessness. Not to be outdone, however, Rush Limbaugh has finally come up with something so tasteless that it almost defies description.

Of course, it's covering the net, fomenting like pond scum, (or BP's gift to America). EVERYONE's writing about it. And in joining the pack, I feel like one of the torch-bearing villagers in Frankenstein.  I can't help it. I'm swept away by the fear and loathing Limbaugh loves to engender. Perhaps that's the reason I hate Rush Limbaugh so much: he MAKES me hate him and laughs when I become one of the villagers.

And he laughs at his own listeners. Last September, he boasted about his wealth ($400m and counting) and said he didn't see any recession. Some of his "faithful" must have winced at that one. But now people all over the country are wincing. More than wincing. Liberal America is foaming at the mouth (I know I am!). This latest will set Limbaugh over any BP headline. Just as Limbaugh intended. Because he knows that as long as you provide the American public with entertainment, you will be a man of extreme power.

So thus has Limbaugh provided us with a sideshow of incredible entertainment: WHO will be the first right-winger to denounce him? WHO will be the first suicidal right-winger to defend him? And WHO will simply remain silent? Like his cohort, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh has managed to turn the mocking of children into a political circus. Another thought: WHO among today's "socially conservative" preachers and Religious Right will dare to defend him? Bryan Fischer might. Tony Perkins might. Pat Robertson might, although people would just blame his escalating senility. Michele Bachmann might, but then she may not know who Rush Limbaugh is. That woman's pathetically clueless.

Will Limbaugh get away with it? Of course. His following will accept his deepest apologies. And if he doesn't apologize, there will be this litany of triteness:

"That's just Limbaugh."

"He doesn't speak for us."

"Just another blowhard"

"He probably didn't mean it."

"You've read him all wrong."

"Beck's just as bad."

"Don't pay any attention. He doesn't have any power."

And the ones who OWE Limbaugh some support will be fun to watch in the ensuing bruhaha:  like Sarah Palin. He said  that her book, Going Rogue, was "One Of The Most Substantive Policy Books I've Read." Palin can't be ungrateful for such valuable praise by telling the country that he's a vicious, heartless scumbag. 

Within hours the circus will begin. How long this incident will remain on the front page will be up to Limbaugh and his response. He knows how to work a crowd.

Robertson Redux: Listen Kid, I Love You Even Though You're An Abomination!

It's a wonder that gay Americans are as patient as they are with some of these Religious Right wingers 

- Cenk Uygur, The Young Turks

Patient? Sorry Cenk, not me.  

I have a Google Blog Alert for Pat Robertson giving me the latest news and comments about our illustrious Religious Right Leader, so I was surprised to see that blog roundup smny.net was running comments on a piece that occurred 1 year ago. Then I read the comments. Take two:

Pat Robertson makes me feel ashamed of being a human being

and the more pertinent:

WOW The sad part is people believe this sh*t.

THE SAD PART

Asking for Pat Robertson's advice is like asking a parrot for directions to the nearest hospital: you might get an answer, just not the one you need right now.  Of course, Robertson is always full of it. Advice, that is. Ask me what else he's full of some other time. His book, Bring It On, is chock full of wisdom and knowledge no Christian household should be without. 

For example:

Just what is Islam and why do those people hate Americans so much?

Muhammad claimed to have had a series of dreams and visions in which a being he called "Allah," who was the moon god among the deities in Mecca, a city in Saudi Arabia where Muhammad's father was the keeper of three hundred sixty stones, including a black stone which was probably a piece of meteor... The moon god (the symbol of Islam is a crescent moon) supposedly appeared to Muhammad and revealed to him the tenets of Islam...The name [Koran] means "recitations," possibly because it was meant to be read aloud, but more likely because it was delivered orally by Muhammad to his friends, who wrote it down.

Huh?? WTF!?! Bring It On is proof that Robertson's senile imagination took hold at least  seven years ago (some say much earlier - about 1988 when he ran for President). For starters,  Islam is an Abrahamic religion and follows closely the precepts of Judaism in that it recognizes Adam, Abraham, Moses and (from Christianity) Jesus. The Jews were known as The People of the Book and the Bible was greatly revered and respected. The history of Muhammad's father is not known. Wherever Robertson got the keeper of the stones bit is anyone's guess. "Allah" is probably derived from Aramaic and means "one, incomparable God." The "moon god" did not appear and reveal secrets to Muhammad, but rather the angel Gabriel did. 

One more important note: reading about the Qu'ran will present a clearer picture of Islam's intents and purposes and will accentuate the similarities between Islam and Christianity, some things Robertson would never want you to know. Today's evangelizing Imam need  only a television camera and a suit to look like they're on a 700 Club of their own.  And after reading the Qu'ran, look to the Old Testament of the Bible, then ask yourself if the Abrahamic religion of Moses is still a "religion of peace."

Of course, even Robertson agrees that some of the questions he answers in his book are somewhat strange, but let's face it, anyone who asks Pat Robertson about anything these days is quite clueless. The man never ceases to amaze people which the broad spectrum of what he doesn't know. At the drop of a hat (or less), Robertson will tell you what's wrong with wearing a tattoo ("it's pagan and ugly") to declaring bankruptcy (it's Christian depending upon the amount).

Robertson never mitigates his tone either. Whether it's making pronouncements about  "Haiti's pact with the devil" or feminism turning women into lesbians and witches,  he never misses a beat. After all, he reasons, he's only the messenger of God and God's demands. And he doesn't care what people think about his advice. There is no quibbling about it. Robertson/God has spoken. 


So in The 700 Club segment in question,  Pat Robertson  took to the airwaves to mete out his sage advice to a mother whose question was:

How should we, as parents of a homosexual son, handle the ongoing challenges facing us such as staying true to our faith and following the commandment "love your neighbor as yourself?" This is very difficult for us. - Teresa.

Robertson then proceeded to question the age of the son - as if he knew what he was talking about and the age would determine his answer (Not!)


Then he pondered the idea of there being "real" or "fake" homosexuals by calling them "so called" homosexuals and trying to distinguish between "homosexuals because of biological problems" and the rest of us, who, in his view were "made homosexuals BECAUSE OF A COACH OR GUIDANCE COUNSELOR, or some other male figure who has abused them." Then came the hard line zinger:  tell him the "truth" because "I love you" and  "the Bible says that this is an abomination before God."  

"I mean if someone is on the way to hell, you have to rescue them." 

Recently, Pat Robertson gave advice to a woman whose husband was constantly flirting with other women. His advice? Make yourself prettier and get over it.

I've read just about every name people have called Pat Robertson and most of them banish him to some remote alternate reality reserved for the inane footnotes of history. The problem therein lies that while we should not listen to what he says, we need to listen to (and monitor) the people who DO listen to what he says.


And while there are some who think that Robertson's just another example of a snake oil salesman falling in love with his own snake oil,  there are too many people in America who touch their TV screens in hopes that Pat Robertson will heal their hemorrhoids. 

Only one? That's still too many. Remember:

WOW The sad part is people believe this sh*t.

Heather Knows Best: Two Moms Really Can Make A Right!

And She's No Accident!!

This event has two important revelations:

First: for the first time since I've covered the machinations of FOX News, it has managed to get something from the left right (got that?). OK, I'll start again: FOX News has dared to put a gay-positive piece (from Reuters) in its daily net news! Yes. OMG! And it didn't edit the headline.

Which brings us to the second (and more important) revelation:  Children of Lesbian Couples Do Well in School, Life. Oh, some of the other MSM picked it up, (TIME/CNN did a good piece, but the headline said Study: Children of Lesbians MAY Do Better Than Their Peers), but Fox News stated it as a straight news piece.

The Christian Right is reeling from the shock at both the results of the study and the fact that their biggest voice dared to publish those "inspired by Satan" results. Do they have enough time to launch a counter-attack? Of course,  you can bet that members of the Christian Right community are hatching plans to thwart reporting in as many MSM venues as possible.  

They've already attacked co-researcher Nanette Gartrelle as a lesbian and therefore biased. But they have another Elena Kagan on their hands, in a sense because, like Kagan, Gartrelle and  her co-author, Henny Bos have flawless academic careers: (Gartrelle) MD: Center of Excellence in Women's Health, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California and JD: Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law, Los Angeles, California,  (Bos) Graduate School of Pedagogical and Educational Sciences, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Wendy Wright of Concerned Women of America was the first to fire a shot at the study:

"You have to be a little suspicious of any study that says children being raised by same-sex couples do better or have superior outcomes to children raised with a mother and father," she said. "It just defies common sense and reality."

But "Common Sense and Reality" in this case, are both on the side of a lesbian's children: who but a person  who has experienced discrimination is fit to raise children who might be discriminated against? In a sense, Wright is also condemning the journal Pediatrics, a trusted judge of such findings. Like other medical journals, Pediatrics subjects a rigorous investigation to each and every study it publishes. Is such a criticism rational?  Bryan Fischer of the radical Right American Family Association is, at this writing, podcasting a tirade against the study, citing past (discredited) studies by the mouthful.

The study, labeled US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study: Psychological Adjustment of 17-Year-Old Adolescents, was conducted over 17 years with 78 sets of lesbian parents who underwent in vitro fertilization and resulted in these findings:

Results According to their mothers' reports, the 17-year-old daughters and sons of lesbian mothers were rated significantly higher in social, school/academic, and total competence and significantly lower in social problems, rule-breaking, aggressive, and externalizing problem behavior than their age-matched counterparts in Achenbach's normative sample of American youth. Within the lesbian family sample, no Child Behavior Checklist differences were found among adolescent offspring who were conceived by known, as-yet-unknown, and permanently unknown donors or between offspring whose mothers were still together and offspring whose mothers had separated.

Conclusions Adolescents who have been reared in lesbian-mother families since birth demonstrate healthy psychological adjustment. These findings have implications for the clinical care of adolescents and for pediatricians who are consulted on matters that pertain to same-sex parenting.

None of the children, by the way, were home-schooled. The study also points to the fact that lesbian parents are more attentive to the needs of the children which may account for their having less behavioral problems. 

And...

It is unclear why kids of same-sex couples would be in better psychological shape than those of heterosexual parents. While the researchers are still analyzing the internet questionnaires, Gartrell said one reason could be that lesbian mothers had planned their parenthood carefully and were prepared to help their children though any discrimination they might face.

"These were chosen children, they weren't accidents," Gartrell said.

But future children of lesbians may still have a barrage of discrimination hurled at them in the coming years. Remember the bruhaha over Heather Has Two Mommies? According to the American Library Association, the book ranked 11th as the most frequently challenged book in the United States in the 1990s.

(Pssst) An aside: Guess who's hometown library refused the donation of Heather Has Two Mommies for Banned Books Week? Hint: the town's in Alaska. You Guessed! Yeah! Mrs. Palin has already had some tense times with her local library, but we're sure she'll accept the news of this report very well. (Giggle) 

And the rabid discrimination against lesbian mothers was evident in the Right's media coverage of the Florida adoption case:

Melanie Leon and Vanessa Alenier, the South Florida lesbian couple who last month won a court case to adopt a child despite Florida's gay adoption ban, apparently weren't sufficiently ugly for the Florida Family Policy Council's propaganda purposes. So in an email blast to its members decrying the decision, the group swapped out a picture of the pair for a photo of two women wearing men's button-down shirts, mullets, and a little upper-lip hair.

We'll see more of this kind of intentional slander in the coming weeksNow that the LGBT community has some solid research on its side concerning lesbian moms, the next step is obvious: one involving gay dads. 

Well, just in time for Father's Day! Hmmm...

The Bleaching of Arizona

"I'm not a racist by any stretch of the imagination, but whenever people start talking about diversity, it's a word I can't stand."

                                  - Steve Blair, KYCA-AM talk show host and Prescott City Councilman.

A mural on the side of an elementary school in Prescott, AZ is quickly becoming the icon of Arizona's legislative and educational goals. It depicts the actual children of the school in solidarity for green transportation. Sounds cool, eh? But one city councilman/broadcaster wants it destroyed. Because the most prominant child in the large mural is black. And most of the other kids are ...brown. 

While painting it, the local artists were subjected to the epithets of "nigger" and "spic" shouted out of passing cars. The principal of the school has decided that the best thing to do under the circumstances is to lighten the faces of the kids!

R.E. Wall, director of the Prescott Downtown Mural Project, described weeks of tense working conditions for the "Mural Mice," the group of artists responsible for the Miller Valley mural and several others around town.

Wall reports hearing comments such as "You're desecrating our school," "Get the ni----- off the wall," and "Get the sp-- off the wall."

"The pressure stayed up consistently," Wall said. "We had two months of cars shouting at us."

Faces in the mural were drawn from photographs of the Miller Valley School (no student over 10 years old, Miller Valley being only a K-5 school). The artwork was chosen by both students and faculty. 

Steve Blair, the broadcaster/councilman says he is "ashamed" of the "diversity power struggle" that he thinks is depicted in the mural.

It hasn't been reported yet what the children in the mural think about their images being lightened to conform with Prescott's image of itself. Neither has it been said what they think of the people of Prescott who obviously hate them.

Prescott's image is getting to be the image of Arizona as well. 

The Law and The Wall

President Obama recently met with Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to discuss the illegal immigration situation faced by Arizona. She was emphatic that the new law empowering law enforcement to demand proof of citizenship was not engineered for racial profiling. She also insisted on the 1200 troops promised to beef up border patrol and completion of the security wall at the border. 

She said that the meeting was "cordial." I'll bet. 

And the 3 R's

From Think Progress, April 30:

Today, the Wall Street Journal reports that the Arizona Department of Education “recently began telling school districts that teachers whose spoken English it deems to be heavily accented or ungrammatical must be removed from classes for students still learning English”:

Etnic Studies as Chauvanism:

[State Superintendent for Public Instruction Tom Horne] claimed the ethnic studies program encourages "ethnic chauvanism," promotes Latinos to rise up and create a new territory out of the southwestern region of the United States and tries to intimidate conservative teachers in the school system.

Unfortunately, the "conservative teachers in the school system" may be the chauvanists, literally trying to whitewash the school system while teaching that ethnicity is not "American." The slant of Arizona's new laws will definitely create a slope as slippery as snow on frozen rain: people WILL be profiled, children WILL be dicriminated against and taught only nationalism. Ugly racism WILL increase. Education WILL suffer. 

If Thomas Jefferson were here now, he would weep for the inequality of man in the southwest. Then again, his tears wouldn't matter - he's been demoted in Texas history.

 

Necessary Segue: Would You Want Milk From This Guy's Dairy?

While I have always championed the humane treatment of animals, I 've never really considered myself an animal rights activist. This video, would change anyone into an ardent activist. Bar none. When I saw it, I knew that everyone I knew should see it as well. PLEASE keep in mind, it's brutality of the most vicious and mindless and not for the faint of heart.

Soon after the Conklin Dairy Farm video release, authorities arrested Billy Joe Gregg, 25, a Conklin employee, on 12 counts of animal cruelty and he is being held at the Tri-County Jail in Mechanicsburg, Ohio on $100,000 bond.

Fascism in America Will Be Wrapped In A Flag, Carrying A Cross and Have a VERY Raspy Voice!

Is Lou Engle The Most Dangerous Man In America?

In 1996, editor (AU magazine) and writer Rob Boston wrote The Most Dangerous Man In America? Pat Robertson And The Rise Of The Christian Coalition. I've read the book and appreciated its straightforward take on Robertson's hypocritical form of Christofascism. I recently perused some of the reviews of the book on Amazon.com:

But the man [Robertson] is fringe. He's dumped his own personal fortune into his misguided ambitions. His movement is fading. At worst, all he did was channel folks who would have otherwise supported Pat Buchanan or third parties behind the established Republican candidate. His "Family Channel" - his main cash cow - is long gone, and the 700 Club will be off the air when the Disney Acquisition of the Fox Family Channel is complete.

Pat Robertson is history, not the bogeyman.

That review was written in 2002. "The 700 Club" is still broadcasting specious stories of "inspiration" and "decadence" and Pat Robertson is still broadcasting his talks "with God" and somewhere in America a little old lady in a rest home or a trailer park still touches the screen when Robertson appears hoping that he'll manage to cure her hemorrhoids. Yes, Pat Robertson is still with us, but his bloviations about Katrina, Haiti, Hugo Chavez, Ariel Sharon and all things gay have chipped away at the man's charisma. Many people think that senility has finally settled in Robertson's brain.

The problem is that Robertson still gets recognition. At 80, Robertson has a bigger political base than his father (Senator Absolom Willis Robertson) ever achieved. He has the ability to get attention wherever he is.  And he uses that recognition with wild abandon.

But is he still the "Most Dangerous" in America's all-male political elite?Or has raspy-voiced evangelical Lou Engle taken over that role? Fiery preachers have come and gone, but Engle's violent speech is in league all its own:

My son, Jesse, he's nineteen years old. God has given him dreams, to go to San Francisco to launch a house of prayer - one block frpom the Castro District - where homosexuals boast the dominion of darkness. He's going there with weeping in his heart. With a dream that prayer is stronger than the dominion of that spirit.

...he's starting to cast out homosexual spirits out of our new converts. Its scary as hell... but fathers are to send their sons into the darkest places. ...St. Francis - Francis means 'free man'. San Francisco is the City of the Free Man.!

This last pronouncement I looked up. "Franciscus" means Frenchman. And while Francis, in some etymologies, means "free," Francis does not necessarily mean "Free man!" BTW: interestingly, the nickname "Francis" was given to Giovanni ("John") di Bardone by his father who was, at the time, an Italian cloth merchant enamored of all things French.

O.K., so that's a little picky, but expand Engle's half-truth into an hour-long sermon. Throw in some quotations from one Bible translation, then from another. Keep on demonizing, demonizing, demonizing until people think that a place like San Francisco has everyone practicing Satanism on the streets. Make people think that walking near 18th and Castro is an act of foolhardiness or extreme courage for anyone who is righteous. Make them think that everyone they see will automatically go to hell if they do not listen to your message. Make them think they may be coerced into homosexual acts in order to obtain dominion over a person's soul.

Engle uses pre-teens and teens in an indiscriminate, manipulative, and destructive way: both he and his son use Fundamentalist Biblical buzz-words constantly and never, ever let up. From start to finish, they never give the teenage mind a chance to question, a chance to think. The teenager is bombarded, pummeled with  confusing sentiments:

TheCall belief and intent has never been about promoting hatred toward the homosexual community as a whole or towards individuals who identify as LGBT. We have always sought to offer a message of love and redemption to those with same-sex attractions, though at times our communication could have been expressed more effectively and graciously.

Considering the vehemous condemnation of an entire group of people as being possessed by demons, any statement of the sort is disingenuous at least, or an ugly lie at most. I've tried to figure out exactly how teens have gotten hooked on his sermons: he has no more charisma than any other street preacher who screams redundant word after redundant word. In a sermon given to "Holywood", Los Angeles in 2007 during a pre-TheCall rally, (and during the most virulently anti-gay portion), Engle refers to "God" 44 times, himself ("I") 31 times, "Dream" 15 times, "Mel" or "Gibson" 10 times, "Jesus" 6 times, and "Christ" 4 times. "Love" is never mentioned. 

Like Rod Parsley, Engle's rhetoric is somewhat military in tone, but "blood" is given a more commanding presence. Like other firebrand preachers, the frequent mention of "God" is the vengeful, jealous, self-righteous God of the Old Testament.

Engle, along with Scott Lively and a small band of other preachers/lawyers were very instrumental in encouraging Uganda on its "Kill the Gays" bill. It would be unnecessary to say more, but to the politically and morally obtuse: Lou Engle bad - tolerance good.

The Second Original Sin

An Obscure Biblical Doctrine 

Spread By Today's Christian Right

I was born in an infant asylum. OK, a orphanage.* A Catholic orphanage.** I was a bastard. OK, to be more PC:  illegitimate. It was only by the grace of Edna Gladney*** that "Illegitimate" was not stamped on my birth certificate, but that's another story. I then went on to a Catholic grade school that took pleasure in immediately informing us kids that we were born in sin. Original Sin. Two strikes against me? I was born in a mess of bastards in addition to a blot on my "permanent record"?

The guilt set in early.

Later on, I found out that the guy who founded and fostered the idea of Original Sin, Saint Augustine of Hippo, had an Oedipus complex and such massive guilt about it that he figured everyone should share in the pain. Nice work, Augustine. You set the stage for Western Civilization's cockeyed world view: everyone's born with a black mark against them. "We're ALL sinners" has been used to soften the blows from street preachers and pulpit pimps the world over. It sounds more egalitarian than just pointing the finger and casting the first stone.

In Augustine's view (termed "Realism"), all of humanity was really present in Adam when he sinned, and therefore all have sinned. Original sin, according to Augustine, consists of the guilt of Adam which all humans inherit. As sinners, humans are utterly depraved in nature, lack the freedom to do good, and cannot respond to the will of God without divine grace.

But (horrors!) what if there is more than one Original Sin? What if a certain sin could be passed on from one person to the next - like a cold?

I think there is such a sin, and it is so bad that its effects can be horrific. However, the reason we don't hear about it from our pulpits is because of the method of contagion: for the method is just as bad as the sin itself.

The Second Original Sin is like the First for it is found at birth. Second birth, that is. It is the Original Sin peculiar to the Born Again Christian. I am writing of course, about the sin of Intolerance.

"But not all Born Agains are intolerant!!"  No, they are not. But that is simply because some are de-programmed not to be so later on. Intolerance is born along with the Born Again. Simple, but true. I suppose some people might argue that a Born Again chooses to be intolerant, but that would be counter-intuitive to a Christian. No, it's a simple fact that all Born Agains are born with the black mark of intolerance until they can prove otherwise.

Think of it: a Born Again does not think, but KNOWS that he is saved by Jesus Christ the son of the One True God. The Born Again also KNOWS that others have not been saved. The Born Again is flush with the knowledge that God loves him and counts him as a true Christian: the insufferably righteous phrase "It's the Christian Thing To Do" is proffered every time, everywhere. The Born Again KNOWS that his distinct spiritual philosophy is true and others are false and evil. The  Born Again is always on the lookout for sinners in every nook and cranny with the hope that he can save them, thereby chalking up one more saved soul on their spiritual scorecard. The Born Again avoids people who have shunned his offer of salvation or dares to counter his divine reasoning. The Born Again is a novice at demonizing, but an eager pupil: the sin of Intolerance does not need much encouragement. Under the guise of "love" a Born Again is allowed to bludgeon a person's life and loves with impunity. The duty of the Born Again is to make you feel as shameful and guilty as possible.

And along with that grave sin of Intolerance come its sister sins of righteousness: righteous arrogance, righteous indignation, and righteous stupidity****

The ministers who hang every sermon, every word on John 3:5 are the conductors of the Original Sin of Intolerance, passing it on ... no ... BESTOWING it as a great gift to the Born Agains. The most obvious and vocal example is Lou Engle who manages to make Intolerance sound very virtuous and very righteous:

In speaking of the legalization of same-sex marriage in California, Engle has alleged that "What happened to California will release a spirit that is more demonic than Islam, a spirit of lawlessness and anarchy. And a sexual insanity will be unleashed into the Earth." Lou Engle has also said: The most "dangerous terrorist" is not Islam but God. One of God's names is the avenger of blood. Have you worshipped that God yet."

Born Agains (especially Born Again ministers) like Lou Engle will always be tainted with the sin of Intolerance because they embrace it and consider the sin to be a badge of honor. Of course, we call it Intolerance, while they call it Righteousness.

And it is not, as some people think, easy to be saved from the sin of Intolerance. Salvation involves opening the mind that the ministers and mentors closed. It involves looking at others without being judgmental in any way. It involves honoring the right of individual thinking. It involves pure love. 

I know that sounds naive: salvation from Intolerance can't win against Engle's imagery of blood, war and martyrdom. Maybe it is.

But it's the only way of erasing the black mark of the Second Original Sin.

Just a thought.

* The sobriquet "asylum" was not always paired with "insane," although some of the orphans may have differed. 

** I popped out of my mother's womb into the arms of a big, strapping nun. I know I screamed "PUT ME BACK!!" after I saw her, but not having mastered sounds much less the English language, it came out as a cry the ancient nurse/nun ignored.

*** Edna Gladney's life was immortalized by actress/diva Greer Garson in the movie Blossoms in the Dust." Gladney looked nothing like Greer Garson, but was able somehow to get the disgustingly boorish and "conservative" legislators of her state to remove the word of shame. The state was Texas, of course.

****There is also an obscure sin of righteous halitosis that effects some Born Agains who become ministers and people who hang around water-coolers.